Will do so again, enjoyed it.
Printable View
Will do so again, enjoyed it.
What can I say, winning important national championships is tiring. Gotta give the little guy a break every once in a while ;-)
disclaimer: I know absolutely nothing about sports
That's certainly possible, but it's pure conjecture and to say he's been "caught lying" because of something in his speech the other day? That's retarded.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
The thing is, he said exactly that before he gave the speech that gozen linked. He got on public Tv and denied any knowledge of the rev having those kinds of views up until the past few months.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frogacuda
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GdRUhCT--rI
as for "what on earth is cheeks trying to saying"
I'm saying he's a freaking liar.
Buttcheeks for the WIN
What if, now here's a thought, the Rev. DID infact adopt those views within the last few months?
MEGATON.
But only politicians switch views.
omg flip floppa
Flip flop holla!
http://johnstodderinexile.files.word...ays-soccer.jpg
HE WAS DEAD THE WHOLE TIME /plottwist
I actually agree with Obama's reverend.
Me to, best money Clinton could spend
You have to vote for Obama or else you're a racist.
Militant Honky imo.
So being against Obama makes you a nigger honky?
That doesn't make any sense.
Or are you?
Wheee McCain's going senile.
Quote:
Sen. John McCain, traveling in the Middle East to promote his foreign policy expertise, misidentified in remarks Tuesday which broad category of Iraqi extremists are allegedly receiving support from Iran.
He said several times that Iran, a predominately Shiite country, was supplying the mostly Sunni militant group, al-Qaeda. In fact, officials have said they believe Iran is helping Shiite extremists in Iraq.
Speaking to reporters in Amman, the Jordanian capital, McCain said he and two Senate colleagues traveling with him continue to be concerned about Iranian operatives “taking al-Qaeda into Iran, training them and sending them back.”
Pressed to elaborate, McCain said it was “common knowledge and has been reported in the media that al-Qaeda is going back into Iran and receiving training and are coming back into Iraq from Iran, that’s well known. And it’s unfortunate.” A few moments later, Sen. Joseph Lieberman, standing just behind McCain, stepped forward and whispered in the presidential candidate’s ear. McCain then said: “I’m sorry, the Iranians are training extremists, not al-Qaeda.”
lol nice.
WheeeQuote:
This past week, Sen. Barack Obama's former pastor Jeremiah Wright has come under heavy fire in part over comments that suggested the U.S. government had introduced AIDS into black communities.
But it turns out he's not the only religious confidant to a presidential candidate who thinks the state has targeted black populations with death and disease.
Reverend Rod Parsley of the World Harvest Church of Columbus, Ohio -- whom Sen. John McCain hails as a spiritual adviser -- has suggested on several occasions that the U.S. government was complicit in facilitating black genocide.
In speeches that have gone largely unnoticed, Parsley (who is white) compares Planned Parenthood, the reproductive care and family planning group, to the Klu Klux Klan and Nazis, and describes the American government as enablers of murder for supporting the organization.
"If I were call for the sterilization or the elimination of an entire segment of society, I'd be labeled a racists or a murderer, or at very best a Nazi," says Parsley. "That every single year, millions of our tax dollars are funding a national organization built upon that very goal -- their target: African Americans. That's right, the death toll: nearly fifteen hundred African Americans a day. The shocking truth of black genocide."
He goes on.
"Right now our own government is allowing organizations like Planned Parenthood to legally take the innocent lives of precious baby girls and baby boys and even footing the bill for it all with our tax dollars, turning every single one of us into accessories to murder," he says. "You know who their biggest fans must be, that must be the Klu Klux Klan, because the woman who founded this organization detested black people.... African Americans were number one on Margaret Sanger's list. So this 'Lady MacDeath,' as I like to call her, studied the works of Englishman Thomas Robert Malthus, and embraced his plan of eugenics."
edit: Link
lols, the TV writers should be recording this storyline to run on Dallas next year.
You mean BSG?
you have a link for that?Quote:
Originally Posted by YellerDog
Up dated
Huffington Post? Come on YellerDog, you're better than that.
Her accent is hilarous!
True.
That isn't very likely. Even Oboma admits in his speeches that the rev's feelings are deep seeded feelings from the past and that he did not feel the same way as he (obama) did not partake in those events of the past, blah blah blah.Quote:
Originally Posted by YellerDog
So no, I'm not going to buy that he became an angry racist preacher in the last half year.
I think the main deal is, religous leaders, all of them, tend to latch on to some out-there shit, as far as "mainstream acceptability" goes.
I haven't really had that problem. I haven't heard any out there shit about politics in a church in
years. And it isn't because I don't go, or go to only one kind. I go Every week and I go to friend's church when I'm invited (baptist, CoC, methodist, Mennonite(sp?), catholic, etc)
In fact, most religious leaders would consider the rev to be a non believer or very poorly educated by what he says. Jesus himself said that the government and our leaders in it should not be hated or condemned. The rev is doing just that.
Jesus also says that you shouldn't really hate homosexuals either, but let's take a look at 50% of religious followers.
I don't know very many religious followers that hate gay people.
I know of maybe handful of people who kind of sort of have loose ties to Christianity that use everything they know in life to justify their hate.
Another thing, for those who want to believe that the rev just became this way.
Did you look at the congregation's reaction?
They really got into it, and showed no disapproval. In no way did they react in a way to show that the topic at hand was a new one.
Either it was new and Obama goes to church with a bunch of racist, or it wasn't and all the people who disapproved found another church.
I found the most laughable part of the whole thing to be when Obama compares Wright to someone's crazy old uncle. The reason we tolerate crazy relatives is because we have no choice, we're RELATED to them. We don't involve them in every aspect of our lives, we involve them as little as possible and wish they weren't related to us so we could just drop them. It was also really honorable of Obama to compare the grandmother that raised him to a hate-mongering preacher he chose to associate with for political gain.
His grandmother was a racist bitch.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
I love btw, how we can't possibly have a candidate that doesn't partake in bouts of flag sucking patrotism twice a day and because of this the entire election will come down to "I Love America more than him.", "No. I do, look at my pins!!!"
Except he didn't say he had never known him to say objectionable things, nor that he has never openly disagreed with him before. He said he didn't hear him say those particular things that were being played on the news. And there's no reason to believe that isn't true. He didn't say "If he ever offended me in the past I would have stopped associating with him entirely."Quote:
Originally Posted by buttcheeks
Why do I even have to explain that? How dumb are we as a fucking country that someone could post that on youtube thinking it was a contradiction and we'd all sit around and nod our heads. Fucking ponderous.
Racist bitches don't raise black kids that grow up to be legitimate presidential contenders.Quote:
Originally Posted by youandwhosearmy
Voters don't need "flag sucking patriotism" but they generally like to have a President that doesn't take an America-hating racist that celebrates 9-11 as his mentor. The whole "OMG he doesn't wear a flag pin!" thing got no traction whatsoever in the voting booth and neither did his wife's bitter anti-American bullshit. Obama's been given a fair amount of leeway with the anti-American stuff.Quote:
Originally Posted by youandwhosearmy
Didn't Bush meet with Jerry Falwell twice a month for most of his presidency?Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
Of course they do. They are already "religious leaders"Quote:
Originally Posted by YellerDog
The story shouldn't be whether or not his pastor is racist. He is, the issue is most black people agree.
The story should be why the hell do black people and white people have completely different views on social progress. Where was the fork in the road? After MLK died?
Do you think people generally like having Bush as their President?Quote:
Originally Posted by Frogacuda
Also, is anyone here stupid enough to think Obama shares Wright's views despite the fact that they contradict his entire message, or is this all a lot of phony outrage because the news is telling us to be outraged, like the Imus situation?Clearly they were willing to vote for him at least. I think it was the years of incompetence that soured people more than anything.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
There's no way of knowing one way or the other if Obama shares Wright's views (I suspect his wife does but that's irrelevant). What's troubling is that a candidate running on his ability to use proper judgement took Wright as his mentor. I don't care either way, Wright's not the reason I'm not voting for Obama. I'm not voting for Obama because, while I find him to be a charismatic and inspiring leader, I disagree with his assessment that we don't pay enough in taxes and need more government programs. The "soak the rich" political platform is age-old populist bullshit that doesn't even serve the purpose of bringing in more tax revenue. In the beginning of the 20th century the top tax bracket jumped from 7% to 77% and tax revenue barely increased. Rich people always find a way to escape unfair taxation; trying to overtax them just results in the middle class footing a bigger part of the bill.
Wright is not Obama's political mentor. He's his pastor and spiritual mentor. All the crazy talk that happens inside churches is irrelevant, and if Obama is smart enough to seperate what people say in his church from how he thinks on the senate floor, then he's doing his job.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
Clearly you are correct that his public affiliation with Wright has not been a wise political move and people have reacted strongly to it (many months later when the news told us it was the time to be outraged about it because prolonging this race is good for their ratings), but does it actually reflect on his politics? I don't think so, and I think we all know that.
I agree that we can't make assumptions about Obama's political views based on Wright's. I think the problem is that we don't have much of a record to judge Obama by. It is pretty funny that the mainstream media is ignoring the fact that Hillary flat-out lied to the voters in Ohio about NAFTA to get their vote, then after the primary stopped delaying the release of White House documents that prove she lied. How is anyone still under the spell of the Clinton three-card monte act?
I've known quite a few Bush voters and none of them were ever very excited or enthusiastic about Bush. It was more about him being slightly preferable to the train wrecks the Democrats trotted out to run against him. I couldn't bring myself to vote for him in 2000 after what he did to McCain in South Carolina and I voted for him in 2004 because the alternative was John Kerry. Fahrenheit 9/11 did more to bolster Bush support than anything. Good job fatass.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frogacuda
I'm more worried about the insane theocrats McCain has surrounded himself with than I am Wright. The point is that no one, except a moron like Bush, pays anything more than lip service to 'spiritual advisors'. The lies the right have spread about Obama and his wife (and they are lies, I dare Spo to bring up any of them and I'll send them flying into the stratosphere) are about as paperthin as possible. They're nothing compared to what we'd see rear its ugly head again if it's Clinton that wins. Anyone here want to hear about the Clintons of killing Vince Foster again, knowing there's never been any evidence? How about the charges the Clintons are on the payroll of Chinese intelligence? It'll put this stupid fluff about Obama's pastor and the non-story about his wife's activism to shame. Look beyond the current newscycle, people.
Also, Fahrenheit 9/11 didn't bolster support for Bush or against him. Kerry was a horrid candidate and he still kept it close by the anti-Bush vote alone. I don't give Moore credit enough to have that kind of impact. The people who disagreed with him were too up their own ass to even watch the movie, and the people who agreed with him were already going to vote Dem.
I know you love railing against the right-wing machine Gozen but the right is kicking back and chomping popcorn right now; all the anti-Obama stuff is coming from the Clinton camp.
2004 was basically voting for Bush or anyone-but-Bush. Don't front.
I'm sure they're behind some of it, but that shit like the TN GOP calling Obama a terrorist sympathzier and that dumbfuck talk show guy at the McCain rally constantly referencing his middle name? Come on, don't be coy. Everyone smells blood, neither of them want to deal with a charismatic person like Obama, so they have to tear him down as quickly as possible so everyone can go back to choosing the candidate they can just barely stomach, as opposed to one they support.
It'd be more accurate to say it was about either voting for anyone-but-Bush or anyone-but-Kerry. People are still shocked by Obama because most people haven't genuinely liked a presidential candidate in several years.
Gozen's absolutely right, there's nothing at all shady or corrupt about the Clintons. It's all just propaganda from the right-wing attack blogosphere conspiracy machine thing.
I'm shocked people are naive enough to like Obama personally. I prefer to judge a job applicant by qualifications myself.
I never said there's nothing shady about the Clintons, but luckily for them the right-wing tinfoil hat brigade has backed so much ridiculous bullshit that the bad stuff they have done falls through the cracks. I mean, come on, do you think they orchestrated some vast conspiracy to have Vince Foster killed?
Clinton has been running her campaign without scruples at all. It's an orchestrated mud-fest, and it I was honestly proud of America for not buying into it... until last week.
Yet you voted for Bush.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
Do you know 50+ people that have died under mysterious circumstances?
A governor who has run businesses beats a Senator who has done nothing.Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
LOL, yeah I've heard about this, it's laughable bullshit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
Didn't lincoln serve one senatorial term and some local shit before he became president?Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
If the job is for a spokesperson (and that's a big part of this job) being an excellent orator, a persuasive personality, and generally likable ARE part of the qualifications.
You forgot to factor in affirmative action. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
You're sure the Clintons are behind "some" of it? Because a couple of fringe wackjobs on the right said stupid stuff about Obama that McCain then denounced? The right has no reason to get involved at this point when they can just sit back and let Hillary do their dirty work. Karl Rove is a pussy compared to the Clintons when it comes to running dirty campaigns. We're talking about the same camp that executed a severely retarded black man just to appear tough on crime (Ricky Ray Rector).Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
Fixed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
You're throwing up a death penalty case as proof of Clinton wrongdoing? Are you fucking kidding me? When Bush streamrolled a record number of executions through during his time as Governor?Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
Yawa and Gozen...Biff and Yoshi, we are like a nerd version of star wars (yoshi is palpantine), I'd consider jumping in on this but I'm a bit buzzed and getting ready to go out. I need to be on my A game to pinch hit in this game and I don't have it.
Tomorrow it's on motherfuckers
Nice.
Gozen is Yoda.
I'm Obi-Wan.
Your Vader.
Yoshi is Palpantine.
This means I get to disfigure you horribly.
Spo is Jar Jar btw.
I didn't say it was proof of Clinton wrongdoing. I said it was proof that the Clintons have no shame or decency when it comes to running election campaigns. Unless you want to continue to exist as a caricature of mouth-breathing liberal fanboys and argue that jetting back to Arkansas to execute a black man with an IQ of 54 right after losing the New Hampshire primary in the first Presidential election after Willie Horton had nothing to do with politics. You should aspire to be more like Frog; I don't always agree with his positions but he's consistent about them and maintains one set of principles across the board. You'll find an excuse for any Democratic offense, no matter how heinous, while calling Republicans war criminals for far less. I mean sweet fuck dude, just yesterday you were trying to excuse the Japanese internment. How do you expect to be taken seriously?Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
That's funny, I thought you were the waste of space that posts 200 times per day while never adding anything to any discussion? I'm Vader, Yoshi's Palpatine, you're the AT-AT pilot in Empire that thinks he's hot shit for blowing up the shield generator after the Rebels already started evacuating.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff
LOLS
Spo I do more than copy and paste other's positions when I debate politics. Perhaps you had me on ignore when I was doing a shitton better job than you in defending our (shudder) common position.
There is nothing that Frog does that I don't. I can't think of any political position he holds that I'm somehow radically to the left of, in fact I think there's been more instances of me agreeing with someone like Yoshi (who I actually have a lot of respect for and can debate with rationally) for pragmatic reasons. You, on the other hand, spew out right-wing talking points and I get sick of people around here sitting and taking them without challenging you.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
I never, for a second, excused the Japanese internment. I only pointed out that your attempts at equivocation between it and the illegal detention and torture of people at Guantanamo Bay was faulty. How do you expect to be taken seriously when you make such claims?Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
Who's positions have I copied and pasted? I only wish I had you on ignore, you're not a bad guy but you just try so hard and it's painful to watch.
A blast from the past:Quote:
Originally Posted by youandwhosearmy
Spo going to that response makes me lose faith in you.
Explain exactly HOW I was trying too hard when I made my post or stop trying to be the anti-gozen.
:lol: :lol: :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
yeah, that was good.
although I would have went with this;
http://www.bsnews.org/pictures/image..._star_wars.jpg
I'm a bit jealous though, Biff. You get to throw the token black guy out the window to his death.
I kill token blacks like it's my job, I'm a militant.
That's totally buttplant.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff
Frog rightly holds the Clinton campaign responsible for most of the drudge that's been trotted out against Obama for starters, you don't.Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
You played semantics with the term "concentration camp" and then argued that the Japanese were not tortured and were "compensated", as if that makes it ok. You seem incapable of understanding the fact that incarcerating foreign terror suspects and waterboarding three of them is not as heinous as incarcerating an entire ethnic group of innocent American citizens for no reason and seizing their property. You'd really be happier with Bush if he instead imprisoned every American Muslim for no reason at all and seized their property so long as he didn't waterboard three of them and gave them a few thousand dollars in forty years?Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
Here, I'll break it down for you:
Bush = imprisoned foreigners based on suspicion of mass murder
FDR = imprisoned Americans based on ethnicity
I never said it made it ok. I think it's a national shame, personally.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
Except that isn't whats happening. There have been countless innocent people incarcerated, and several of them have been tortured to DEATH while in custody. The government has admitted to waterboarding three people, that's a far cry from the estimates given of what has actually been done. No, I'm not saying that two wrongs make a right, I never have. What I am saying is that you can't compare one with the other. Certainly, detaining the Japanese Americans was bad policy, but it is not equivalent to the gross human rights violations that occur now.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
I never said that and I don't think that. All I'm saying, all I've ever said, is that your attempts to equivocate were wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
Fixed.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
Again, let me point out that neither are legal or moral, but they are nowhere near equivalent.
Then why would you make excuses for it, like pointing out that they were "compensated" and haggling over whether we call them concentration camps or internment camps? Furthermore, why would you portray FDR as the second coming of Christ if you had such a big problem with the internment?Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
Facts and evidence are all we should be concerned with, and we have hard evidence that Bush waterboarded three people (all three proven terrorists) and hard evidence that FDR imprisoned over a hundred thousand people based on ethnicity alone. You just complained about bringing up the Clintons and Vince Foster without hard evidence; one standard will do just fine here.Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
Yet you continue to maintain that the Guantanamo operation is a bigger stain on the country than the Japanese internment, so why wouldn't it be better if Bush just did what FDR did?Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
We have evidence he tortured three people from 2002-2003 (not indefinitely) and there was certainly evidence against them. Khalid Sheik Mohammed helped plan 9/11 and beheaded Daniel Pearl, Abu Zubaydah also helped out with 9/11, and Abd al Rahim al Nashiri helped in the USS Cole plot. They bragged freely on terrorist web sites that they were guilty before they were captured. Bush admits the three were waterboarded.Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
I wasn't making excuses, I was clearing the record because you were purposefully trying to distort it to make it seem henious the same level as what's happened at Gitmo, or Abu Gharib, or extraordinary rendition, etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
I did no such thing. Everything I said about FDR was true. I was giving a balanced account of the good things he did to the smear job you were pushing. I never said he was perfect, but he did good things for America. Unlike Bush, who has done nothing but harm to this country. Point of fact.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
We have facts and evidence, we have estimates released by the Pentagon about the number of detainees who died violently in custody (it's 108, by the way). Even granting that the only released number of waterboarded is three, that's ridiculously irrelevant when juxtaposed to the outrages of Abu Gharib or other cases where people were tortured to death in military or CIA custody. The Vince Foster incident is about as far removed as possible, because there has never been any doubt as to his death being suicide by anyone who has really investigated the case (and there have been three official investigations, by the way, all of which ruled suicide). No, the only person applying a double standard here is you. You're cherry-picking to condemn FDR and exalt Bush while at the same time accusing me of doing the same thing in reverse. The only difference is that you're ACTIVELY making excuses for the torture and detainment, while I'm doing no such thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
I think you need to take a hard look at your own position before you keep digging trying to frame things in such a way to make it look like I supported Japanese internment. I didn't and never will, I just, as I've said numerous times, cannot remotely compare it to the outrages of today.
Gozen, here's the difference between you and I. Bush and FDR had the same blatant disregard for the law and committed similar offenses (though I maintain that imprisoning Americans based on ethnicity and nuking civilian targets is far more heinous than anything Bush has done). I, a conservative, freely admit that Bush is a flawed and incompetent President and that I can't wait to have a new President. You, a liberal, defend this as a "balanced" description of FDR:
Understand yet?Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
Some Japanese Americans died in the camps due to inadequate medical care and the emotional stresses they encountered. Several were killed by military guards posted for allegedly resisting ordersQuote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
BTW, FDR himself called them "Concentration Camps" and those reparations you love to mention was provided by Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush (two of your favorite people).
It's taken you this long just to admit he was flawed and incompetent, after years of defending him to the death when people like me, YAWA, and (god help us) even Almaci were screaming from the rafters that he was both of those things. Now, though, you dodge my point that you're excusing his brand of torture by trying to elevate the heinousness of FDR (who, I might add, never nuked anyone. He was dead at the time).
Again, let me say, I think Japanese internment was terrible. But it doesn't mean FDR never did anything good for America, or that he as a politician was less eloquent. If you keep trying to compare FDR to Bush, I will keep pointing out how wrong you are. Your attempts to try and cast this as something wrong with me as a person, rather than admit your argument was bad, shows just how shaky the ground was that you based your foundation on.
How many were brutally tortured to death? I'm counting zero.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
Yeah, not comparable.
Completely irrelevant. Though for what it's worth, the Civil Liberties Act of 1988 which provided the reparations was put forward by Democratic Congressman Norman Mineta and passed through with help from the Democratic majority in Congress.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
I've admitted Bush is flawed since before he was elected (when he smeared McCain) and I've admitted that he's incompetent since Katrina. Now stop dodging my point about the concentration camps.Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
We have no evidence that any prisoners were brutally tortured to death at Guantanamo. We do have evidence that innocent Japanese-Americans died from poor conditions and were executed for "resisting orders" while imprisoned. Even if we did torture more terror suspects and even if we consider "innocent" and "terror suspect" to be the same thing, how is starving to death or dying from lack of medical care not torture? I'd rather be waterboarded than starved to death or executed any day of the week.Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
BTW we both know FDR developed the atomic bomb and sanctioned using it on civilian targets in Japan. That's what it was developed for. FDR died before he got the chance to unleash his masterpiece so Truman did it for him.
I'm not dodging anything. Point out where I said Japanese internment was legal or justified. Show me where I made a single excuse for it, morally or legally. I'll save you the trouble, I never did.
Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
Roosevelt himself called them concentration camps yet you argue that they weren't concentration camps, but rather "only" internment camps. People were starved to death, allowed to die from lack of medical care, and executed for "resisting orders" yet you claim they were never tortured (implying the treatment was better). You point out that they were eventually released (what the fuck does that have to do with anything? The overwhelming majority of Gitmo detainees were released as well) and the "compensation" you keep citing totaled $37 million...after the government seized $148 million worth of property and detained them illegally. You've done nothing but make excuses and attempt to downplay the severity of the internment.Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
I never have attempted to downplay the severity of it. Not once. I have only shown that it's ridiculous to compare it to Gitmo (and the majority of them HAVE NOT been released, the majority of them haven't even been CHARGED WITH A CRIME). You're trying to beef up the internment, because you know it doesn't compare with the brutal torture of detainees, over a hundred of which have DIED in custody. You're the one making a half-baked attempt to justify outrageous behavior. I never have. Stop trying to cast it any other way.
Most estimates place the number of dead Japanese internees around 200, though we'll never know for sure because the government never released a body count. The same source you're citing for that 108 number also reported that the overwhelming majority of the detainees were released. Which crime were the Japanese charged with again? FDR was a war criminal, admit it if you truly care about portraying the internment accurately.
Fine, what FDR did to the Japanese Americans was a war crime. I readily admit it. I still think he did many other good things for this country, but that doesn't excuse his actions there. Now, will you admit that internment is nowhere near comparable to brutal death by torture (which the same link you're referring says the majority of deaths were by) of detainees by Bush?
Then call him a war criminal. Come on, it's your catch phrase. Do his "many other good things" excuse his drafting and authorizing a plan to nuke civilian targets that his surrogate carried out after his death?Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
Your source says nothing about "brutal death by torture", it says 108 people died in custody and many violently. An American President imprisoning an entire ethnic group of U.S. citizens for no reason, with some starving to death and others being executed for "resisting orders", is far more heinous than an American President detaining foreign terror suspects (who are protected by no law or treaty as they are not uniformed combatants) and waterboarding three of them for information about future attacks after confirming that they confessed freely to mass murders.Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
g0zen, am I right presuming that you do not call FDR's situation "concentration camps" because those words have certain connotations nowadays connected to the German concentration camps? While both situations were wrong beyond mention, I should hope that the situation here in the states does not garner direct comparison with the situation in Germany.
That was my intention by clarifying, because it was Spo's intention to cast it in the worst possible light. Yes. Now, of course, you see Spo completely unable and unwilling to admit how wrong he was to compare. He also goes on to do exactly what he claims I did (but didn't) and defends brutal death by torture sanctioned by a President. So, I think this argument is over.
As an asian american, I can say this ...
It wasn't just Japanese Americans, it was a whole RACE, bud. Luckily they only arrested the West Coast, but still.Quote:
Originally Posted by wikipedia
Also, as an Asian American I love FDR, but what he did to my people is as evil as what Bush is doing. I can't believe you don't see the parallel.Quote:
Originally Posted by wikipedia
The Japanese lost their livelihood and were placed in camps that were substandard. At least Gitmo is covered under the Geneva Convention. Most of the atrocities in these camps were not revealed till the "Final Act" report was released in 1984. Many died due to walking beyond the gate. I don't see how this is NOT worse than dying from torture or at least comparable.
FDR called them Concentration Camps, why is it unfair for me to do the same? I already addressed the whole "brutal death by torture" accusation here:Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
Stop regurgitating discredited talking points.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
probably cause you sound like an idiot that probably doesn't go to church to even know the first thing about how any Christian religion works.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frogacuda
For him to say that he has never heard any of this stuff is like saying that I go to church but never heard about jesus or that church's take on how to be saved or the proper forms of worship. Preachers only have so many topics that they like to talk about. If you go for a year, you will hear most of them. So it is hard to believe that if uses this guy as an adviser and has been going to church for almost 20 years, that this topic has not come up before. Especially considering how passionate the rev was with his beliefs.
Shit man, lets take religion out of this. Both of them are black. And they work on a team together for political advancement. Those two things mean that they have most likely discussed the race issue before. Do you honestly think Obama was not aware of the rev's views?
He does a pretty good job of not sounding like a wet douche. Can you try doing that?Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
I was a religion minor, btw, and I probably know more about Christianity than most practitioners of the faith. I was also raised in a religious household and I'm more than familiar with how preaching works. But nice try.Quote:
Originally Posted by buttcheeks
But he didn't say that. He said he wasn't there on those dates in question to hear those particular sermons. He did NOT say that he never heard anything offensive from the guy. Where are you getting that?Quote:
For him to say that he has never heard any of this stuff
He never claimed to be. In fact he had previously said that he was.Quote:
Do you honestly think Obama was not aware of the rev's views?
So are you emplying that he was aware of it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Frogacuda
Do you realize that makes his reaction even more stupid?
If that was true, he is basically saying "lol, I knew about that shit, but I'd only done something if I'd been there at the time."
who the hell does that? And how would it be the right thing to do? How is it morally right to let a freind that you are show boating around to gain votes with a certain crowd be a racist, and somehow act like thats ok, cause you've never been around when they were doing it?
he is essentially making the argument that its ok to be a peice of shit as long as it isn't done around you. That may be ok for your drinking buddies, but its freaking retarded in polatics.
Freaking retarded in polatics? Are you drinking?
When someone says that Zombie FDR dropped the bomb, the thread is over.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
Fuck Zombie FDR, we need this fella;
http://i106.photobucket.com/albums/m...bie-reagan.jpg